Another Hit Piece on President Trump

[Sol]

[Wide-Eyes]

Imagine that!  The Atlantic owner was a mega-donor to the Biden Campaign. 

I'm shocked!   :mediumomg:

Yesterday, the Atlantic magazine released a hit piece on President Trump claiming that he called World War 1 Veterans losers. (More on that later)

What should shock no one, it turns out that the owner of the Magazine, Laurene Powell Jobs, is a Joe Biden mega-donor.

Plenty more to read here:  Source

#didn'treadthethread.

My bad. 

[Wallfire]

@"Antisthenes" From a professional point of view I find your use of words, formation of sentences and the very practiced way you can  draw people into an arrangement then manipulate the discussion that you are seen as the person been attacked..
I am tempted to say you are more than one person writing and you want people to fight with you.
But what ever not worth getting my BP up about

As I have an "antithetical" perspective to most here, I can see where you think I seem bellicose. My intentions are nothing more than bringing alternative perspective to the table.

    I assure you, I am one person and not some cabal sent here to draw folks into whatever it is you may imagine. If one wishes to keep their BP in check I would think sites like this sre the last place you'd want to visit.

    A good deal of my previously engaged friends have become apolitical for just that reason. ;-)  

I put a standard question in my reply, (my BP) and you answer gave a lot of info.
With all the other info you have given its my opinion that-
1. You are more than one person, this includes guidelines and info been given to you.
2.  You could be an internet Agent Provocateur, you cannot be reasoned with or be a part of a constructive discussion, indeed your word chose when you write would indicate that you do believe in what you post, but just want to get people upset. Your standard is not very high so its a question if you are getting paid or not.
There are many other reasons, but I sure you know them

[Antisthenes]

@"Antisthenes" From a professional point of view I find your use of words, formation of sentences and the very practiced way you can  draw people into an arrangement then manipulate the discussion that you are seen as the person been attacked..
I am tempted to say you are more than one person writing and you want people to fight with you.
But what ever not worth getting my BP up about

As I have an "antithetical" perspective to most here, I can see where you think I seem bellicose. My intentions are nothing more than bringing alternative perspective to the table.

    I assure you, I am one person and not some cabal sent here to draw folks into whatever it is you may imagine. If one wishes to keep their BP in check I would think sites like this sre the last place you'd want to visit.

    A good deal of my previously engaged friends have become apolitical for just that reason. ;-)  

I put a standard question in my reply, (my BP) and you answer gave a lot of info.
With all the other info you have given its my opinion that-
1. You are more than one person, this includes guidelines and info been given to you.
2.  You could be an internet Agent Provocateur, you cannot be reasoned with or be a part of a constructive discussion, indeed your word chose when you write would indicate that you do believe in what you post, but just want to get people upset. Your standard is not very high so its a question if you are getting paid or not.
There are many other reasons, but I sure you know them

Ummmmmm.....no.

Your standard is not very high

There's no reason to bring my dating life into the conversation.

[Snarl]

Uh huh...sure...whatever you say. Where are Mattis And Kelly to to disavow all this?

Disappointed in both of those ass-hats.  No military officer should ever be allowed to double-dip again.  It was forbidden/frowned on for decades.  A policy we could all benefit from.

and John McCain was a hero 

John McCain was a self-serving POS.  If someone had doused him with gas ... I would have gladly tossed the match.

He's (President Trump's) an embarrassment to the ideal represented by the flag I served under.

Indeed he is, where his opportunity to serve, was so obviously shirked.  I don't like the fact that his support for the Elites and those with vast wealth is instantaneous ... while he makes the little guy wait for his 'opportunity' for a loaf of bread.  I ain't fooled!! ... not a bit.

Only ... don't ask me to vote for Hillary over him.  And don't ask me to vote for Kamala (which is what the Dems are really offering) instead of him.  We The People should tear this country apart, burn it to the ground, and torture everyone whoever took a dime from politics ... based on what choices we're being presented with/limited to.

And this "Soldiers are Losers/Suckers" BS ... I think I remember this being associate with Henry Kissinger a long long time ago.  Mandela Effect?

[Antisthenes]

Hi Snarly ;-)

[Ninurta]

    And as for my opinion, Sperry discussing the "hit piece"? That's hyperbole as well until their is a substantiation that it didn't happen. Pointing the crooked finger without any real proof has become de rigeuer and part of this Administrations M O.'s.

Unfortunately, a negative can never be proven, because if it didn't happen, then of course no evidence was created. That's the entire basis for the American presumption of innocence in jurisprudence.

 

At any rate it may be time  we just want to take Ninurta's advice and cut the Marionette chords free and actually make our own moves and think critically about what's actually unfolding here.

I said that? Really? I didn't realize I could talk like that!

No - what I mean is: Yeah, YEAH! THAT'S what I meant! You just said it prettier than I could!

.

[Mystic Wanderer]

    And as for my opinion, Sperry discussing the "hit piece"? That's hyperbole as well until their is a substantiation that it didn't happen. Pointing the crooked finger without any real proof has become de rigeuer and part of this Administrations M O.'s.

Unfortunately, a negative can never be proven, because if it didn't happen, then of course no evidence was created. That's the entire basis for the American presumption of innocence in jurisprudence.

 

At any rate it may be time  we just want to take Ninurta's advice and cut the Marionette chords free and actually make our own moves and think critically about what's actually unfolding here.

I said that? Really? I didn't realize I could talk like that!

No - what I mean is: Yeah, YEAH! THAT'S what I meant! You just said it prettier than I could!

.

I've heard some talk that President Trump might start a new party. The old democrat party is toast; now socialist-communism.

The Republicans are a weak bunch of pathetic little people with no spines to push their agenda; knock-them-down-with-a-feather type of people.

I affiliate myself with neither party. I've always called myself an Independent, but of course an Independent candidate never gets elected, so we're all just out here screaming into the wind.

There needs to be a new party. What that party will be remains to be seen.

[Sol]

    And as for my opinion, Sperry discussing the "hit piece"? That's hyperbole as well until their is a substantiation that it didn't happen. Pointing the crooked finger without any real proof has become de rigeuer and part of this Administrations M O.'s.

Unfortunately, a negative can never be proven, because if it didn't happen, then of course no evidence was created. That's the entire basis for the American presumption of innocence in jurisprudence.

 

At any rate it may be time  we just want to take Ninurta's advice and cut the Marionette chords free and actually make our own moves and think critically about what's actually unfolding here.

I said that? Really? I didn't realize I could talk like that!

No - what I mean is: Yeah, YEAH! THAT'S what I meant! You just said it prettier than I could!

.

I've heard some talk that President Trump might start a new party. The old democrat party is toast; now socialist-communism.

The Republicans are a weak bunch of pathetic little people with no spines to push their agenda; knock-them-down-with-a-feather type of people.

I affiliate myself with neither party. I've always called myself an Independent, but of course an Independent candidate never gets elected, so we're all just out here screaming into the wind.

There needs to be a new party. What that party will be remains to be seen.

Nothing to do with American politics but people, here where I live, were starving for a new provincial political party, being fed up with the two big ones.

One came along, got elected and is now in power. Same old, same old. Lots of promises, lots of good media attention even though they surf on bureaucratic bullshit. They manipulate numbers, they thrive on the covid situation and they deliver emptiness under a false sense of protection.

The system is rigged. Two parties divide the people. Three divides the people into a 2 against one game, which is really one against one when you think of it and the people think they still have a choice. This new one is borderline Dictatorship. The system is flawed. No matter how many parties are aligned. The results are always the same. It's flawed.

[Mystic Wanderer]

10 Witnesses Go On The Record Stating Atlantic Report On Trump Denigrating Troops Is A Lie

Four more witnesses have gone on the record to say that The Atlantic’s anonymously-sourced report claiming President Donald Trump called dead soldiers “losers” and “suckers” is false, bringing the total to 10.

Mick Mulvaney, former acting White House Chief of Staff, shot down The Atlantic’s report, saying, “As you all can probably imagine, I have seen more than my share of outrageous (and false) attacks on the President over the last few years. But this whole injured soldiers thing really, really pushes the envelope.”

“So, just to be clear: These claims are simply outrageous. I never heard the President disparage our war dead or wounded. In fact, the exact opposite is true.  I was with him at the 75th Anniversary of the D-Day invasion in Normandy. As we flew over the beaches by helicopter he was outwardly in awe of the accomplishments of the Allied Forces, and the sacrifices they paid.”

Johnny DeStefano, former counselor to the president, also disputed the report, saying: “I was on this trip. The Atlantic bit is not true. Period.”

Derek Lyons, staff secretary and counselor to the president, and Dan Walsh, former White House deputy chief of staff, have also both denied the report.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said on Friday that Lyons said in a statement:

I was with the president the morning after the scheduled visit. He was extremely disappointed that arrangements could not be made to get him to the site and that the trip had been cancelled. I have worked with the president for his entire administration. One of my responsibilities is working with him on the many letters he signs to the families of our nation’s fallen heroes. In all my time at the White House. I have never heard him utter a disparaging remark of any kind about our troops. In my view, he holds the brave men and women of our armed forces in the highest regard.

McEnany then read Walsh’s statement: “I can attest it to the fact that there was a bad weather called in France and that the helicopters were unable to safely make the flight. Overall, the president’s support and respect for our American troops past and present is unquestionable.”

All of this comes after former national security adviser John Bolton—who is a fierce Trump opponent—went on the record and disputed The Atlantic’s report.

“I didn’t hear either of those comments or anything even resembling them. I was there at the point in time that morning when it was decided that he would not go Aisne-Marne cemetery,” Bolton told Fox News. “He decided not to do it because of John Kelly’s recommendation. It was entirely a weather-related decision, and I thought the proper thing to do. I never heard he made that kind of comment about another country’s forces either, no.”

Fox News correspondent John Roberts further added:

“. @AmbJohnBolton told me today that if @realDonaldTrump had said he didn’t want to visit Aisne-Marne because the interred heroes were “losers” and “suckers”, he would have written an entire chapter about it in his book #TheRoomWhereItHappened.”

The Daily Caller News Foundation also reported late this week that the owner of The Atlantic is a Biden megadonor who is in frequent contact with the person who authored the report.

Source

Okay, I await the names who said the President said those things now.  Just know that "anonymous sources" won't cut it.

[Antisthenes]

10 Witnesses Go On The Record Stating Atlantic Report On Trump Denigrating Troops Is A Lie

Four more witnesses have gone on the record to say that The Atlantic’s anonymously-sourced report claiming President Donald Trump called dead soldiers “losers” and “suckers” is false, bringing the total to 10.

Mick Mulvaney, former acting White House Chief of Staff, shot down The Atlantic’s report, saying, “As you all can probably imagine, I have seen more than my share of outrageous (and false) attacks on the President over the last few years. But this whole injured soldiers thing really, really pushes the envelope.”

“So, just to be clear: These claims are simply outrageous. I never heard the President disparage our war dead or wounded. In fact, the exact opposite is true.  I was with him at the 75th Anniversary of the D-Day invasion in Normandy. As we flew over the beaches by helicopter he was outwardly in awe of the accomplishments of the Allied Forces, and the sacrifices they paid.”

Johnny DeStefano, former counselor to the president, also disputed the report, saying: “I was on this trip. The Atlantic bit is not true. Period.”

Derek Lyons, staff secretary and counselor to the president, and Dan Walsh, former White House deputy chief of staff, have also both denied the report.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said on Friday that Lyons said in a statement:

I was with the president the morning after the scheduled visit. He was extremely disappointed that arrangements could not be made to get him to the site and that the trip had been cancelled. I have worked with the president for his entire administration. One of my responsibilities is working with him on the many letters he signs to the families of our nation’s fallen heroes. In all my time at the White House. I have never heard him utter a disparaging remark of any kind about our troops. In my view, he holds the brave men and women of our armed forces in the highest regard.

McEnany then read Walsh’s statement: “I can attest it to the fact that there was a bad weather called in France and that the helicopters were unable to safely make the flight. Overall, the president’s support and respect for our American troops past and present is unquestionable.”

All of this comes after former national security adviser John Bolton—who is a fierce Trump opponent—went on the record and disputed The Atlantic’s report.

“I didn’t hear either of those comments or anything even resembling them. I was there at the point in time that morning when it was decided that he would not go Aisne-Marne cemetery,” Bolton told Fox News. “He decided not to do it because of John Kelly’s recommendation. It was entirely a weather-related decision, and I thought the proper thing to do. I never heard he made that kind of comment about another country’s forces either, no.”

Fox News correspondent John Roberts further added:

“. @AmbJohnBolton told me today that if @realDonaldTrump had said he didn’t want to visit Aisne-Marne because the interred heroes were “losers” and “suckers”, he would have written an entire chapter about it in his book #TheRoomWhereItHappened.”

The Daily Caller News Foundation also reported late this week that the owner of The Atlantic is a Biden megadonor who is in frequent contact with the person who authored the report.

Source

Okay, I await the names who said the President said those things now.  Just know that "anonymous sources" won't cut it.

Wallfire wrote to Antisthenes:

2. You could be an internet Agent Provocateur, you cannot be reasoned with or be a part of a constructive discussion, indeed your word chose when you write would indicate that you do believe in what you post, but just want to get people upset. Your standard is not very high so its a question if you are getting paid or not.
There are many other reasons, but I sure you know them

I have no time for trumps ineloquent, bumbling, horrific, soul wrenching, unpatriotic and hatefilled ramblings. I am too busy with my cabal plotting the overthrow of the free world. Where ever the hell that may be?

[Mystic Wanderer]

I have no time for trumps ineloquent, bumbling, horrific, soul wrenching, unpatriotic and hatefilled ramblings. I am too busy with my cabal plotting the overthrow of the free world. Where ever the hell that may be?

@"Antisthenes", have you ever watched any of the videos I posted about Judith Rose? 
She said she used to be just like you. I bet listening to her might help open your eyes.
I have a thread with several people interviewing her.

You come across as a person filled with hate. That has to be so tiring and draining from your spirit. Am I right? 
Go give her a listen if you ever get tired of hating Trump and all his followers, it'll do your soul good.

[Ninurta]

Nothing to do with American politics but people, here where I live, were starving for a new provincial political party, being fed up with the two big ones.

One came along, got elected and is now in power. Same old, same old. Lots of promises, lots of good media attention even though they surf on bureaucratic bullshit. They manipulate numbers, they thrive on the covid situation and they deliver emptiness under a false sense of protection.

The system is rigged. Two parties divide the people. Three divides the people into a 2 against one game, which is really one against one when you think of it and the people think they still have a choice. This new one is borderline Dictatorship. The system is flawed. No matter how many parties are aligned. The results are always the same. It's flawed.

I'm all for abolishing parties altogether. very few people actually fit entirely into one or the other, most folks are all over the board as regards party platforms unless they are just toeing the party line and have no independent thoughts of their own.

Why does a candidate need a gang behind them to develop an idea of how to run things, anyhow? Just stand up on their hind legs like a human, develop a plan, and put your own individual platform out there! If parties were abolished, folks would have to think for themselves and make their own decisions as to which candidate's platform they think is going to be in their best interest instead of having party pundits make that decision for them.

.

[Ninurta]

 
I have no time for trumps ineloquent, bumbling, horrific, soul wrenching, unpatriotic and hatefilled ramblings. I am too busy with my cabal plotting the overthrow of the free world. Where ever the hell that may be?

Mars is still a free world, I think, as is Titan, although I hear Titan is under attack currently by the Forces of Evil ™ . Jupiter is still free, but cameras there make you look 1000X heavier, because the gravity is strong enough to make you 1000x shorter without reducing your waist size.

Personally, I think we should have hijacked Oumouamoua when it skated through the solar system. We'd be long out of here by now if we had, and could have formed our own government, or not, as the case may call for.

When you DO - overthrow a free world, just stay off my lawn - I'm pretty touchy about that, and I can't shake my cane as vigorously as I used to do.

.

[Antisthenes]

I have no time for trumps ineloquent, bumbling, horrific, soul wrenching, unpatriotic and hatefilled ramblings. I am too busy with my cabal plotting the overthrow of the free world. Where ever the hell that may be?

@"Antisthenes", have you ever watched any of the videos I posted about Judith Rose? 
She said she used to be just like you. I bet listening to her might help open your eyes.
I have a thread with several people interviewing her.

You come across as a person filled with hate. That has to be so tiring and draining from your spirit. Am I right? 
Go give her a listen if you ever get tired of hating Trump and all his followers, it'll do your soul good.

Have you ever noticed how I don't attack you personally? Bright and articulate people address issues and keep ad hom attacks out of the mix because, well frankly, it makes the attacker look out of control and makes them appear to be reactionary. Reactionary response is never a good look. It makes it appear as though the person you are railing against is living rent free in your head. If there is some hate here it would appear to be you for me.

Do you ever listen to Wayne Dyer or Deepak Chopra or Ghandi or even Norman Vincent Peale? No, of course you don't. You might try because you seem to be in emotional straits. You should never take on the mantle of assumption. Insinuating hate is rude. Being arrogant enough to believe you know someone you've never met is....well as I said, it's a bad look.
Now as for fealty to trump? I'm most willing to discuss that. That in fact was the gist of this thread you started. So lets just keep things social and if you might be so kind, quit obsessing on me.

[Ninurta]

I like the new look: 


but it doesn't really show off that glorious sheaf of red hair as well as it ought to do!

Even @"Antisthenes"'s marble statue has a reddish tinge to her hair...

.

[Antisthenes]

 
I have no time for trumps ineloquent, bumbling, horrific, soul wrenching, unpatriotic and hatefilled ramblings. I am too busy with my cabal plotting the overthrow of the free world. Where ever the hell that may be?

Mars is still a free world, I think, as is Titan, although I hear Titan is under attack currently by the Forces of Evil ™ . Jupiter is still free, but cameras there make you look 1000X heavier, because the gravity is strong enough to make you 1000x shorter without reducing your waist size.

Personally, I think we should have hijacked Oumouamoua when it skated through the solar system. We'd be long out of here by now if we had, and could have formed our own government, or not, as the case may call for.

When you DO - overthrow a free world, just stay off my lawn - I'm pretty touchy about that, and I can't shake my cane as vigorously as I used to do.

.

You clearly strike me as a man that it would prove imprudent for me to violate lawn etiquette ;-)

I'm not a rash woman.

[Ninurta]

Have you ever noticed how I don't attack you personally? Bright and articulate people address issues and keep ad hom attacks out of the mix because, well frankly, it makes the attacker look out of control and makes them appear to be reactionary. Reactionary response is never a good look. It makes it appear as though the person you are railing against is living rent free in your head. If there is some hate here it would appear to be you for me.

Ummm... speaking of living rent-free in someone's head:

I have no time for trumps ineloquent, bumbling, horrific, soul wrenching, unpatriotic and hatefilled ramblings.

Are all the descriptive adjectives really necessary, or is Trump just... well... you know, it's YOUR head...

Now as for fealty to trump? I'm most willing to discuss that. That in fact was the gist of this thread you started. So lets just keep things social and if you might be so kind, quit obsessing on me.

I might obsess on you. I haven't really decided yet. I'm sure it would be a welcome respite to @"Mystic Wanderer", as it would give her and "Q" a little rest. Besides, I have a vested interest in keeping the two of you at each other's throats. I know how y'all redheads are individually, and if the two of you ever got together, there'd be no hope for my survival at all...

.

[Ninurta]

You clearly strike me as a man that it would prove imprudent for me to violate lawn etiquette  ;-)

I'm not a rash woman.

There's that, but know also that if you ever try, I'm not above selling video of you climbing the chain link fencing surrounding my lawn on the internet!

.

[Mystic Wanderer]

Antisthenes

Have you ever noticed how I don't attack you personally?

No, I haven't. When you reply directly to one of my post, I most certainly take it that you are addressing me. How else would I take it?  

Bright and articulate people address issues and keep ad hom attacks out of the mix because, well frankly, it makes the attacker look out of control and makes them appear to be reactionary. Reactionary response is never a good look. It makes it appear as though the person you are railing against is living rent free in your head. If there is some hate here it would appear to be you for me.

Trust me, you aren't living anywhere in my head.  
Most people here who have known me for some time know that I'm not a hateful person. I get passionate about my topics sometimes, but I don't hate anyone. I like to spread love, fields of flowers, and butterflies as a vision of our future.  

Do you ever listen to Wayne Dyer or Deepak Chopra or Ghandi or even Norman Vincent Peale? No, of course you don't. You might try because you seem to be in emotional straits. You should never take on the mantle of assumption.

Not Wayne Dyer, but I've read the book, How to Win Friends and Influence People a few decades ago. Does that count?  

Ghandi?  I know about him but haven't felt the need to study him too deeply, being that he's across the pond from me.

Norman Vincent Peale? The power of positive thinking is something I've been preaching for years. I keep telling people how important our thoughts are because we attract to ourselves what we send out.

Insinuating hate is rude. Being arrogant enough to believe you know someone you've never met is....well as I said, it's a bad look.

Now as for fealty to trump? I'm most willing to discuss that. That in fact was the gist of this thread you started. So lets just keep things social and if you might be so kind, quit obsessing on me.

Insinuating was the last thing I had to do. It was clear in your posts about Trump and me being someone you know who follows him.

Now as for fealty to trump? I'm most willing to discuss that. That in fact was the gist of this thread you started. So lets just keep things social and if you might be so kind, quit obsessing on me.

Obsessing?  You must think that I think you are important enough to obsess over.  You aren't. Get over yourself.